I believe the proposed SCA…

I believe the proposed SCA represents a significant setback for species conservation efforts in Ontario.

The revised Ontario Protected Species List removes critical protections from a substantial number of species. Notably, the removal of 42 species, justified by their inclusion under federal protections such as the Migratory Birds Convention Act (MBCA) or the Fisheries Act, is problematic. Federal laws like the MBCA are limited, as they primarily protect birds themselves but do not extend to the conservation of their habitats. As a result, migratory birds—which are already suffering population declines due to habitat loss—face heightened vulnerability. Without explicit provincial habitat protection, declining trends are likely to continue as returning migratory birds may find critical breeding and feeding areas destroyed or compromised.

This bilateral reliance on federal jurisdiction creates substantial enforcement gaps. Historically, federal bodies have had limited capacity to enforce these protections on provincial lands in Ontario, increasing the likelihood that harmful activities go undetected and unaddressed. The transition also shifts screening responsibilities for potential project impacts away from provincial staff, meaning many projects could proceed without meaningful environmental review. Meanwhile, the definitions of habitat protection in federal and provincial statutes often do not align, and federal critical habitat designation only comes after often lengthy recovery strategy processes, during which time species continue to be at risk.

Another troubling change is the exclusion of 64 ‘special concern’ species from protection under the SCA. This represents the elimination of a key preventative measure in species recovery. Special concern listings have traditionally served to flag vulnerable species before their status deteriorates to threatened or endangered. Species such as bats, turtles, and certain birds—especially those dependent on increasingly rare open habitats—are known to rapidly decline when ongoing threats are not proactively managed. Removing their legal protection contradicts accepted best practices in biodiversity management and undermines Ontario’s capacity to forestall biodiversity loss.

The SCA makes regulatory oversight more superficial by shifting formerly detailed review processes—required under the Endangered Species Act (ESA)—to a more perfunctory self-registration system. Proponents can now develop their own conservation plans with minimal official oversight or expert scrutiny. This new model grants project proponents and their hired consultants significant authority over compliance, reducing the ministry’s engagement in project-by-project biological assessment. The system now relies on broad, generalized requirements rather than targeted, species-specific guidance. This fundamental weakening of regulatory scrutiny mirrors the intent of Bill 5, which seeks to speed up project approvals, often at the expense of comprehensive ecological evaluation.

In effect, the risk of population declines, habitat loss, and extinction is shifted from developers and the economy back onto wildlife species themselves and their ecosystems. The result is a system fundamentally misaligned with Ontario’s broader conservation responsibilities, putting both at-risk species and the province’s biodiversity heritage in jeopardy.